Increased font size on Tropospherical site scheme

[momijizukamori]

Title:
Increased font size on Tropospherical site scheme

Area:
Site scheme (Tropospherical)

Summary:
At the moment, Tropo shows entry and comment text at 75% of browser default. This winds up being a bit on the small side, compared to other similar websites, which leads to squinting and headaches after lots of site-schemed page reading for people who don't usually experience these problems, particularly as Tropo Red is the 'default' people who are new to the site see. Increasing this a bit (I would suggest 0.85em) would increase readability

Description:
This came about as a result of some of the LJ-migration recently, where a number of people who are not usually photosensitive mentioned getting headaches after browsing on both Tropo Red and Tropo Purple for a while. I did some poking about in CSS, and discovered that the 0.75em size scales text down to a bit smaller than the size I usually see on blogs or LJ's old site schemes. It's basically in that range of 'just enough change to cause problems, not enough change to be immediately noticeable'.

I wrote a quick Stylish script to increase font size to 0.82em (along with a slightly smaller line height, but I think it's the font-size that's the core issue) and got feedback that yes, it was a lot more readable that way. 0.82em is kind of weird, and I'd probably just say round up 0.85em to be neat about it.

The problem with writing it as a Stylish script, though, is that any time someone is not at their home computer, it's back to site default (and I do realize that there are other site schemes, but most people I've talked to don't like the horizontal navigation of Celerity and find black-background even harder to read). Increasing the font-size just a bit should be a fairly easy fix (unless it's not in CSS styling? I haven't had a chance to poke through files), and it's not a big enough change to negatively affect users who didn't have the problem with the smaller font size while helping people who do.

Poll #9005 Increased font size on Tropospherical site scheme

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 81

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
33 (40.7%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
23 (28.4%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
8 (9.9%)

(I have no opinion)
17 (21.0%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[facetofcathy]

My with changes: Set it to 1em.

This is the (correct in my opinion) recommendation of W3C. They had a discussion two years ago when they redesigned their own site and decided to take their own advice which covers the pros and cons succinctly.

Yes, a lot of sites use .875 em which is a 14 px font assuming a user has 1em=16px, and no assumption about user preferences is ever safe. So if you switch to 1em, your site might look inconsistent with the web. Except the web isn't consistent and letting the user find their font size options if they care to make it smaller beats forcing them to find them if they have to make it bigger.

I also think concerns about pan-internet consistency are less and less important now that more and more sites are going for newer responive designs and giving up on trying to design the user's experience for them. Fonts set to 1em are more and more common.

(God, now I need an annoying responsive design crank icon to go with the tag on my journal.)

[laitaine]

+1

[kyrielle]

+1

[elf]

+1 Yes yes PLEASE. Set default view to 100% size; users can adjust their own settings from there.

[turlough]

+1

[pleonasm]

+1

This is the primary reason that I don't use Tropo Red/Purple without an accompanying Stylish script. The font is just too small.

[ursamajor]

letting the user find their font size options if they care to make it smaller beats forcing them to find them if they have to make it bigger.

This.

[rainfall]

Unfortunately, changing your settings for just one site isn't easy. I can't make my default font size smaller in Firefox without affecting every other site I view. It's asking users who want smaller font sizes to use Stylish, the same way the OP was protesting for users who want larger font sizes.

I would rather see it made .85, a compromise everyone can live with, than see the comms flooded again with users asking why Dreamwidth's font size is so big.

I mean, Dreamwidth USED to operate on 1em. I remember it! They changed to this for a reason.

[instantramen]

+1

[lorax]

+1

[momijizukamori]

I'm okay with this with-changes :) I was mostly fiddling around and comparing off of the old LJ site scheme, which was well-liked, and I'll fully admit I'm not as well-versed in standards as I should be. If W3 recommends 1em, that's probably a good way to go. And I agreed that 'a little too large' is far, far preferable to 'a little too small'.

[kaberett]

+1

[eruthros]

+1

This is part of why I don't use the Tropo site schemes.

[runpunkrun]

+1

Now that I've almost gotten used to that enormous Arial over on LJ, Tropo looks too small.

But I also like the idea of making it a separate scheme, like Tropo Large, or making the site-scheme font size something we can individually customize (if that is even possible).

[tamouse]

+1

[arethinn]

+1

My first thought was "but why not 1em?"

[kerravonsen]

+1

[sharpiefan]

I view site stuff in Celerity (which I like) and I've just gone to look at at Tropo Red... It's definitely smaller.

I like the fact that on most journal layouts, DW's default text size is bigger than LJ's or other websites, making it easier to read someone's entries. If DW is concerned with that, and making things accessible, they ought to have their default site skin in a bigger font size too.

It shouldn't take much to increase the font size overall, and I think it would give people a much better first impression. (And I might go back to some colour of Tropo, too...)

[ninetydegrees]

There's a bug open to increase it to 1em.
I think I suggested it actually. I'll try and find the link once I'm no longer on Tiny Phone. :)

[azurelunatic]

You did! http://bugs.dwscoalition.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2834

[momijizukamori]

Totally did not realize this was already in the system!

/goes to lay claim to that bug.

[rainfall]

If we're agreed that Dreamwidth's settings bring the font size to 14px, then LJ's font is the same size. But LJ is using Arial, which looks bigger at 14px.

Just adding that in for thought.

[momijizukamori]

The new scheme on LJ is Arial, but the old one used Verdana, like DW does - font-face was one of the first things I checked *g*

[green_knight]

I think most of the responses can be summed up as 'make it bigger, and let the user decide the size'. Personally, I would LOVE to be able to use Tropo Purple - but I can't read the text, so I'm stuck with the boring beige I *can* read. Personally, I really would prefer to have the site the size that I've chosen - because, well, I've chosen it so I can read it easily, but if other people on other systems find that makes it too big, a more flexible solution seems to be called for.

[stormy]

I'm going to have the most unpopular opinion of all. Just hear me out.

I'm comfortable with the Tropo schemes. I don't adjust my browser font out of necessity. Dreamwidth especially has taken to measuring their site design with em. It's a measuring system that adjusts with font size. It's similar to saying I want this margin to be 20%, but if you take your font size up or down - this adjusts to fill the page. It's supposed to give the same visual feel across the entire site no matter your font size. Things are supposed to adjust depending on your preference.

It means that while everyone sees the same site, it's not all at the same size.

Personally, I do not like everything on a site being measured with em, but I've come to adjust to this on Dreamwidth. I like my font size on the smaller size - close to a classic 12pt (because I like it to feel like a page of paper, and browsers generally start out at 16) or even down to a 10pt, so the Tropo scheme is absolutely perfect for me. It's also the closest that matches the size that Google is using.

Now, my problem with changing the schemes to 1em is that everything will become size 16 and absolutely huge. It doesn't just change the font size of the site. It changes everything in proportion.

If people didn't use em measurements for the sizes of the visual elements and adjusting the browser font size only changed the font, I'd have no problem raising or lowering the number in my browser. The problem is the world doesn't generally do that. In fact, most sites (while being slightly inaccessible to others and making them use the ridiculous zoom tool) have standard font sizes of the little AAA to adjust their font and a cookie to remember it). People like things right out of the box to work. If I shrink my font size on my browser, other sites get unreadable font and smaller in the process. Things become unreadable elsewhere. I can't adjust my sizes on Dreamwidth without changing the rest of the internet for this site, because it's the only site that inconveniences me this way.

My other concern is change. Tropo has been fine for many users for several years, and there are other schemes out there that use larger fonts. I'm not opposed to everyone getting to use Tropo, so I suggest something else, but for the purpose of the suggestion, I voted no.

My suggestion is to make a Tropo (Large) scheme with a 1em font, and leave the other Tropo schemes alone.

For a visual example, let's just say I adjust the current site scheme down from my browser's default. If I understand correctly, this is what the complaint is about:

Browser Default (Firefox) 16:


Browser Adjusted (Firefox) 12:


So basically, if you've adjusted your font and changed all your website fonts to be different (or think you have because not every website out there uses em), you'll be seeing the second one. If you've left it as is then you're seeing the first.

I don't change my browser, because then I would see a lot of important sites - like my bank account - become the second one. If that's an easier explanation, then I hope the visual helps. So I hope you'll consider the suggestion that you might just add a second size option to the two Tropo themes.

[momijizukamori]

Some of that is due to some poor assumptions in the tropo coding, having checked the file on my DreamHack. I'm working on changes to those, which would fix the width issue (and some of the visual element sizing). I kind of feel in general though that accessibilty trumps aesthetics when it comes down to just the two of them - and for a default site scheme to give people headaches is a fast way to turn people off the site. I don't know personally how easy it is to add a secondary site scheme of 'Tropo Small' or whatever, though.

[jem0000000]

Small font sizes just make life difficult. I've got my browser set not to allow them to go below my minimum, but it seems counter-intuitive to be deliberately designing below minimum in the first place. And my settings depend on me being on my home computer.